Hate speech against Karabakh Armenian refugees as a domestic political tool in Armenia

25.09.2024

 

Tigran Grigoryan

 

In Democracy Watch’s previous report my colleague Karena Avedissian and I referred to remarks by Gagik Melkonyan, a ruling party lawmaker, who said, “The people of Karabakh should conduct themselves as guests in Armenia.” Melkonyan's statement, which has not been condemned by the ruling party, is not just a case of an irresponsible official making a statement, but rather part of a political pattern and deliberate policy, which aims to gain political dividends by instrumentalizing ‘Karabakhophobia’ and legitimizing anti-Karabakh narratives.

Stereotypes and hate speech about Artsakh people have existed in Armenian society for at least the last two decades. The main reason was probably that the second and third presidents of Armenia were originally from Nagorno-Karabakh, and associations with the vicious phenomena of their administration automatically spread to all Artsakh people. However, until recently, all these narratives existed only in everyday conversations, not in politics, and were publicly voiced only by marginal groups and figures.

This situation gradually began to change after the Armenian authorities’ policy shift on the Karabakh issue. By this, I mean Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan’s policy of “lowering the bar” on the status of Nagorno-Karabakh and all subsequent developments, the peak of which was the ethnic cleansing of Artsakh last September. 

The influx of more than 100,000 refugees into Armenia caused serious political fears among Armenia’s ruling elite. The main fear of the authorities and in their close circles was that the majority of refugees who have lost everything will be actively involved in internal political processes, strengthening various opposition movements.

It is precisely because of these fears that the Armenian authorities and media outlets and public figures under their control began to legitimize the anti-Karabakh narratives mentioned above, taking them from everyday life to national politics. As a result, by bringing these stereotypes to an official level, government propaganda multiplied their negative impact, targeting the most vulnerable group living in Armenia.

In this process, the media outlets under the direct control of the ruling party show particular zeal. We can include Public Television in this list, which, as mentioned in a previous Democracy Watch report, was criticized by the Media Ethics Monitoring Body for violating journalistic norms while covering opposition demonstrations and for spreading hate speech against Artsakh people.

Another media outlet under the control of the ruling party, civic.am, also stands out for spreading anti-Karabakh sentiments. The main message of this outlet and similar media outlets to the Armenian public is that refugees from Artsakh, who are said to have special sympathy for Russia, are the bulk body of demonstrators that take part in the opposition demonstrations.

The instrumentalization of this type of hate speech and propaganda narratives for domestic political purposes deepens the contradictions within society and increases the likelihood refugees will be targeted.

Armenia's law enforcement agencies are also inactive. No proceedings due to the public manifestation of hate speech directed against Artsakh refugees has been initiated by the law enforcement system as of today. During the last few months, one of the former members of the ruling party has been spreading open hatred toward Artsakh people. One of his last posts, in particular, is a poll asking users if they would like the refugees from Artsakh to leave Armenia. Despite the existence of similar posts by this and many other users, none of them have been held accountable for spreading hate.

It is noteworthy that, when government critics commit hate speech, criminal prosecutions are launched.

At this stage, Armenian society, and even its most active parts, are trying to turn a blind eye to this problem. The most common approach is that this is a marginal phenomenon that does not deserve public attention. Many deny the existence of a problem at all, noting that such behavior in social networks is mainly exhibited by fake accounts.

However, the main difference between this wave of hate speech and previous ones is that in this case, there is a clear political agenda. Targeting Artsakh refugees gives propagandists an opportunity to find a scapegoat for the government’s failures in recent years and deflect public discontent against the government.

Targeting one group through propaganda also enables the ruling party to ensure internal political mobilization. These trends, if ignored, can undermine public solidarity in the country and complicate the process of democratic consolidation. After all, the presence of "us versus them" politics may be the first signs of democratic regression and the rise of populist authoritarianism.

 

 

Democracy Watch is a joint initiative by CivilNet and the Regional Center for Democracy and Security, a Yerevan-based think tank.

 

This material has been funded by UK International Development from the UK government; however, the views expressed do not necessarily reflect the UK government’s official policies.